Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36938280›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

Safety and Efficacy of Radiofrequency Ablation and Epidural Steroid Injection for Management of Cervicogenic Headaches and Neck Pain: Meta-Analysis and Literature Review.

Chukwuyem Ekhator, Alyssa Urbi, Basil N Nduma, Solomon Ambe, Ekokobe Fonkem

Registry-linked trialOpen access · diamondFull text readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06689371 (Dry Needling Versus Dry Cupping on Pain and Disability in Cervicogenic Headache Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06689371 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Dry Needling Versus Dry Cupping on Pain and Disability in Cervicogenic Headache Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorCairo UniversityRan2024 to 2025Enrolled45ConditionsDry Needling, Dry Cupping, Cervicogenic HeadacheArmsGroup A (Dry Needling), Group B (Dry cupping), Group C (control)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Chukwuyem EkhatorNeuro-Oncology, New York Institute of Technology, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Old Westbury, USA.
Alyssa UrbiNeuro-Oncology, Brandeis University, Boston, USA.
Basil N NdumaInternal Medicine, Merit Health Wesley, Hattiesburg, USA.
Solomon AmbeNeurology, Baylor Scott and White Health, Mckinney, USA.
Ekokobe FonkemNeuro-Oncology, Baylor Scott and White Health, Temple, USA.
Baylor Scott & White Medical Center - Temple · USBrandeis University · USBaylor Scott & White Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dysfunction of the cervical spine and its anatomical features, mostly innervated by the C1, C2, and C3 spinal nerves, can result in a secondary headache known as cervicogenic headache (CHA), mainly characterized by unilateral pain. The usefulness of pharmaceutical medications and physical therapy is currently the subject of scant literature. Interventional pain management techniques can be applied when conservative treatment is unsuccessful. This study looks at radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and epidural steroid injection (ESI) to identify their safety and efficacy in managing patients with cervicogenic headaches and neck pain. Three databases - PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL Library, and Embase were searched, and 110 studies were identified. Nine screening processes were included for review and meta-analysis. Statistical evaluation was conducted through STATA version 17 (College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC) and effect measures were reported through random effects model risk ratios. The main subject of focus included three following outcomes: incidences of pain relief, degree and duration of pain, and incidences of adverse effects. The findings showed both interventions relieved pain by a factor of >50%, demonstrating a relative effects risk ratio of 1.45 (-0.50, 3.39) for RFA: pain relief, 84.76 (82.82, 86.69) RFA: adverse effects, and 19.46 (18.80, 20.11) ESI: pain relief at 95% confidence interval. The efficacy of RFA and ESI differ. Both interventions are effective in the reduction of cervicogenic headache pain intensity. However, their complication rates and pain duration are considerably different. With ESI, the headaches can still recur weekly, demanding the use of oral analgesics to deal with them. On the other hand, RFA has a low complication rate. Improving guidance from imaging technologies, RFA has the potential to be the most effective interventional treatment.

Indexed as

cervicogenic headacheepidural steroid injectionheadacheneck painradio-frequency ablation

Identifiers

PMID36938280
PMCPMC10016315
OpenAlexW4320486034

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read26
measurements read92
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.